|
I couldn't believe I was
doing this'
Last year Rami Kaplan was a loyal commander in the Israeli army. Now he is
going to court to prove that the occupation of the Palestinian territories
is illegal. Here he tells Jonathan Steele how the destruction of an orange
grove led him to lay down his gun
Jonathan Steele
Tuesday October 22, 2002
The Guardian
It was in Gaza
that Major Rami Kaplan, a 29-year-old "veteran" of Israel's prestigious
Armoured Corps, began to feel that he had had enough. He was increasingly
uneasy about the orders he was given, and the next time he was called up for
his annual reserve duty, he said no. Now, after a month in a military
prison, he has gone on the attack. Along with seven other refuseniks, he is
taking an unprecedented petition to Israel's supreme court. Their case is
not that they have a right to conscientious objection. They are going
further. They claim that Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories on
the West Bank and Gaza is illegal, and that as soldiers they have a duty not
to take part in an illegal enterprise.
This marks another leap forward in the story of the refuseniks, who first
came to public notice earlier this year when some 200 reserve officers
signed an open letter explaining their case. The number of signatories has
now reached 491.
Michael Sfard, one of the refuseniks' lawyers, acknowledges that the
petition has a large degree of chutzpah: Israel's supreme court has already
issued judgments on the legality of various army practices, from the
demolition of houses of suicide bombers' families to the deportation of
suspected terrorists. But using the courts to strike at the whole basis of
Israel's 35-year-long occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is unprecedented.
Two things have changed, Sfard argues. Israel's reaction to the Palestinian
intifada over the past two years has involved so many violations of human
rights that it has become a systematic "mechanism of collective punishment".
Under international law, collective punishment of people in occupied
territories is prohibited.
Secondly, as an occupying power, Israel has certain rights and duties. It is
now clear, the petition argues, that Israel has failed to fulfil its duties
of care to the Palestinian population on such a widespread scale during the
intifada that the whole occupation has been rendered illegal.
Rami Kaplan was an unlikely convert to the refusenik cause. He initially
enjoyed army life, so much so that he signed on for three more years as a
professional officer after his three years of conscription, and rose to
become a tank company commander responsible for up to 100 men.
His first war service was in Lebanon, where he was briefly in charge of a
base set up inside the medieval Crusader castle of Beaufort. "Until 1997
there was a broad consensus that our presence in Lebanon was needed to
protect communities in northern Israel. I was young and didn't have the
ability to judge what was going on. Our contact with the Lebanese population
was minimal," he says.
A short posting to the West Bank during the first intifada in the early
1990s raised his first doubts. He found the army being used as a kind of
police force. "I hated it from the beginning. We were operating in towns and
were ruling the place. I hated going after kids who threw stones. On one
occasion we sent in dozens of troops just to arrest a 10-year-old kid who
was on some list," he says.
When he left the army to go to university and prepare for a job in teaching,
it was not out of a spirit of refusal, he says. He was relaxed about doing
his bouts of reserve duty for a month every year. Catching up again with his
colleagues from the unit, who were also coming in for reserve duty from
civilian jobs, was like an annual reunion.
Things changed in April last year. By then the second intifada was under
way, and Kaplan's tank battalion, of which he was a deputy commander, was
posted to the edge of the Gaza strip. One of its missions was to guard the
fence that separates Gaza from Israel. The other was to protect the access
route to the Israeli settlement of Netzarim, a heavily fortified compound
with gun towers and fences in the centre of the Gaza strip. "Guarding
settlements has become one of the army's main jobs. We had more soldiers
protecting Netzarim than it had settlers," he says.
Kaplan witnessed no atrocities, but what he did see troubled his conscience.
He came to the conclusion that Israel was running a colonial enterprise in
which Palestinians had minimal rights. One of the Israeli army's regular
duties was cutting down Palestinian orchards, vines and palm trees. "There
was a tactical explanation. It was not to punish Palestinians, we were told,
but to make it harder for people to crawl up to the fence and sneak through.
"Occasionally, explosives were thrown or rockets were fired by the
Palestinians, but mainly they were civilians who wanted to get jobs in
Israel. I refused to do these orchard-cutting missions, and my commanding
officer accepted it. On one occasion I had to replace him, and I regret it
very much. It was so painful to see our tanks and bulldozers going through
the orchards. I had to sit on a hillside nearby and watch through
binoculars," he says.
"You could see Palestinians coming out of very poor and miserable houses. A
soldier shouted out, 'They've got guns,' but when I looked through the
binoculars I saw they only had bags with straps over their shoulders. It
wasn't a rifle strap. They wanted to pick as many oranges as possible before
the trees were destroyed. It tore me up. I couldn't believe I was doing
this. No one thought of cutting trees on the Israeli side of the fence. If
we had, we would have had to pay compensation. No one thought of
compensating the Palestinians."
Kaplan found it appalling that decisions on whether to cut the trees to a
depth of 200m or 500m - an issue that affected the livelihoods of several
families - were routinely taken by low-ranking officers. "It was completely
arbitrary," he says.
He also noticed that officers tried to bend the rules of engagement as much
as possible. "Instructions from the chief of staff prevented you killing
people except in extreme circumstances, but I got the impression that at the
regimental level officers tried to give themselves more freedom. They
overinsured so as to protect their soldiers and so that they could fulfil
their missions easily. Commanders became very flexible," he says.
Kaplan lost his belief in the justice of the cause. "If you're a commander,
you have to be very spirited and charismatic to your men. I didn't feel I
had the drive any more. I was sucked out, a shadow of myself. I couldn't get
up in the morning and do what I was expected to do. The whole mission seemed
stupid and a waste of time and money," he says.
His commander was not happy either, but like many other senior officers,
according to Kaplan, he hoped the government would end the intifada and get
the troops out. In the meantime they had to do their duty. "I asked him:
'What happens if we have to cut the orchards to a depth of 5km rather than
500m on the grounds that the Palestinians are getting longer-range rockets?'
"
Back at university, his reserve duty over, Kaplan decided he wanted to write
to get his painful experiences off his chest. Cautiously, he put them in a
fictional context. "It was very difficult to go against the system. I wasn't
yet thinking of refusing to serve. I didn't want to abandon my fellow
officers and soldiers," he says.
His article in an Israeli newspaper caused a minor sensation, and he was
invited to speak at campuses. Then came the decision this year by a group of
officers to refuse to serve on the West Bank and Gaza and draft a letter for
signature. Kaplan hesitated for 10 days before putting his name to it.
Taking the plunge, however, meant committing himself to involvement in
politics. Israel has been affected as much as any other western society by
the liberal "end of ideology" culture of individualism and consumerism, he
says. In Israel there is an extra factor. Under the weight of the suicide
bombing, he argues, Israeli society has become passive and withdrawn. People
retreat into themselves and their families, and stop listening to and
watching the news on radio and TV.
"In a way, the settlers and the refuseniks are similar. Our political views
differ, but we are the only groups in Israeli society that are willing to
take action in the name of something bigger than ourselves," he says.
Buoyed up by the strength of the refusenik movement, Kaplan's views on the
occupation have become more radical. "People ask why I am not defending
Israel against the suicide bombers. But if I'm in the army in the
territories, I'm not protecting people here in Tel Aviv. On the contrary.
It's the army's role in the territories that is the cause of the bombings in
Tel Aviv. Being a soldier increases the danger to my family here," he says.
"You have to be blind to think that people under oppression won't rebel.
Suicide bombing is a new phenomenon. It happened after 30 years. This just
shows how bad the situation in the territories has become."
Kaplan still calls himself a Zionist, and he is proud of the tolerance of
Israeli society. Refuseniks in other armies are not treated so well, he
says. "When I decided to refuse, none of my family, neighbours, or friends
denounced me. Their tone varied between respect for my views and outright
support. An officer in my battalion who is himself a settler told me, 'I
respect you, but keep loving the Jews and the nation of Israel.' I was
surprised but very happy."
In the military prison from which he has just emerged, Kaplan had no
complaints. The group of around 10 refusenik officers doing time with him
were treated correctly. He was dismissed from his unit when he signed the
refuseniks' letter, but he did not lose his rank.
He also believes that the refuseniks are getting wider, if still silent,
support among Israelis than the media suggests. The army has admitted that
only a third of reservists turned up for duty last year, though most found
medical or other excuses for failing to appear. As the economic situation in
Israel worsens, Kaplan thinks more people will begin to criticise the
occupation.
Tomorrow the supreme court will hold its first oral hearing on the
refuseniks' case. The government is taking their argument seriously and is
preparing a highly detailed rebuttal. Even if the court rejects the case -
to do otherwise would be a judicial earthquake - Kaplan and his colleagues
are confident that by criticising the very legality of the occupation, they
will help to bring its end nearer.
• Kaplan begins a speaking tour on Sunday at 4pm at the Red Rose Comedy
Club, 129 Seven Sisters Road, London; 8pm, St John's Wood Liberal Synagogue.
For details, email aviel_luz@yahoo.com .
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
Source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,816551,00.html
|
|